Talk:Properzia de' Rossi

Peer Edit

Overall this article is good and reflects wikipedia's standards. I think that this article is very informative but could use some more edits organizationally wise. The second paragraph in the biography section could be created into a new section about her career or style or technique depending on the other information that would be added to that new section. I think that an addition of at least one more section would be helpful to break up and organize the information.Steph.solomon12 (talk) 20:49, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Untitled

More than about Properzia de' Rossi, this article is about Giorgio Vasari's opinions about her. Perhaps deleting the last two paragraphs would be enough. - Mike Rosoft 20:04, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

I have put in biographical information, and image and then edited the Vasari info and placed that in a paragraph at the end of the entry. It feels cleaned up, so i removed the article needs cleaning up tag. --964267sr 00:23, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Structural and Content Edits

Hello, I'm a student from Muhlenberg College, and I plan to make edits to this article as part of a project for class. I'm interested in changing the structure of the article by creating dividing the biographical section into smaller, more specific categories. For example, the end of Properzia de' Rossi's biography section explains Giorgio Vasari's view of de' Rossi. It would be best if this information is put into a separate section, because it does not directly pertain to de' Rossi's life. In addition, I would expand the biography section by adding information about de Rossi's upbringing and her transition from painting and music to sculpture. I will also be adding more content about her participation in the competitions in Bologna, and how her artwork reflects the role of women during the time period. Ar245891 (talk) 16:36, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Peer edit

I think the information you provided in the article is very informative and clear. The only thing that I think could use some more work is the organization of the article. It might work if you split the biography section into to different sections to make it more clear. You might also want to turn the second section into multiple paragraphs in order to open it up. I think the article might also look more professional if you added some more pictures.Emmashavrick (talk) 20:54, 18 November 2014 (UTC)emmashavrick

Feedback for Article: Properzia De' Rossie

I think you could add a little more depth into the introduction of Properzia de' Rossi. The introduction does not elaborate much on the individual herself but rather her notable mentor who worked for Raphael. It would be nice to know a little more about her timeline and her family background- where was she born? How did she enter the art industry and when? What works is she most famous for? We can also begin to include other artists that have mentored Properzia De' Rossi. Whilst a lot of this may end up being repeated in the "Life" or "Early Life" heading, it would still be a lot better to add the important timeline details in the introduction since it is the first thing researchers of the web or other viewers will end up reading.

Regarding the rest of the article, there are a few grammar errors that make it unclear who is the subject of the sentence: "As a woman of the Renaissance, she studied painting, music, dance, poetry, and classical literature, and studied drawing under Marcantonio Raimondi". Also, terms in that paragraph such as "she tried her hand" can come off as way too colloquial or conversational. It is best to stick to objective phrases but even better to write "she practiced ...".

For the heading "Major Commissions", for the most part it is a great paragraph. One feedback I might give you is to be more specific on the sources used as information about Properzia de' Rossi. The sentence beginning "Records show that she was paid" is not detailed enough and should properly be credited.

With regards to citation, I think you have utilised a good mix of older and newer sources. A lot of them are theses or journals. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HannahPark0709 (talk • contribs) 23:22, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Joseph and wife.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:07, 13 January 2023 (UTC)